<>. %^ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) ^ / o :/. V ^ //, * 1.0 I.I 6" Aotographic Sciences Corporation IM 2.0 1.8 11.25 11.4 11.6 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut canadien de microreproductions historiquss ^ ^ :\ \ >^ <\ >!^ » %^ Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. L'Institut a microfilme le meilleur exemplaire qui! lui a ete possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peutetre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m6thode normale de filmage sont indiquds ci-dessous. D D D n n D D D Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagee Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur6e et/ou pellicul6e Cover title missing/ La titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes g6ographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relid avec d'autres documents Tight binding mey cause shadows or distortion along interio. margin/ Lareliure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou ae la distorsion le long de la marge interleure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout6es lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6x6 filmdes. □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur -^ Pages damaged/ Pages endommagees □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaur^es et/ou pelliculees □ Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages decoior^es, tachetees ou piquees n • Pages detached/ Pages d^tachees Showthrough/ Transparence □ Quality of print varies/ Quality indgale de I'impression □ Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplementaire D n Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 film6es * nouveau de facon d obtenir la meilleure image possible n Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl6mentaires; This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 18X 22X 10X 14X 12X 16X 20X 26X 30X 24X 28X 32X tails i du odifier une mage The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Library of Congress Photodupiication Service The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — ► (meaning "CON- TIIMUED"), or the symbol V (meaning END ), whichever applies. Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grace d la g6n6rosit6 de: Library of Congress Photodupiication Service Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettete de l'exemplaire film6, et en conformit6 avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprim6e sont film6s en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la derni6re page qui comporte une emprsinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont film6s en commenpant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la derni6re page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la derni^re image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole — ^ signifie "A SUIVRE ', le symbole V signifie "FIN ". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent etre film6s d des taux de reduction diff6rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour etre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film6 d partir de I'angle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images n6cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la m6thode. errata I to t i pelure, on ci 32X / V ■■'^/ THE REOIFROOITY TREi?LTY. d^ ^A- V> SPEECH 'y^ or y HON. ALFRED ELY, O i NEAV YORK, DELIYBBED V IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, < / i 'X, I V \ A JUNE 15, 1860 ..j- i- i ^ *'— -«■*■'» WASHlKatON '. 1860» :^d:^fesji&J\': F MtfiiiiriliiiiliiMiMlnMi . .'.. \1 -%■'' L m s^ I f\ THE RECIFROOITY TREA.TY. SPEECH or HON. ALFRED ELY, OF NEW YORK, DELIVEUED, IN THE HOUSE OF REPUESENTATi'vES. JTTNE 15, I860. The llduw being in Committee of the Wliole on the state of the Union — Mr. ELY««id: Mr. Chairman : On the 2Gth of March last I had the honor to move a reeolutiou which was adopted by this«Hou8e, calling upon the President of the United States for information relativ 3 to the practical working of the treaty concluded with Great Britain on the 5th day of June, 1851, commonly called the " Reciprocity Treaty." I will thank the Clerk to read the resolution : '•Resolved, That the Tresidentof the United State8 be, and he is hereby requested to cotninuiiicate to this House, if in his opinion not incompatible with the public interest, all the information in his possession relative to the practical working of the Reciprocity Treaty concluded with Great Britain on the ftth day of June, 1854; whether the Provincial Government of Canada has not through its Legisla- ture, violated the spirit of the said treaty — what has been the practical effects of the 3d clause of the said treaty npon the interests of the respective countries. What measures, if an)', have" been taken to procure correct information touching the practical operations and effect of the 3d clause of the said treaty Upon the in- terests of American citizens, and whether in his opinion the said 3d article of the said treaty could not with advantage to American intei'csts, be either amended or rescinded." . . To this resolution no response has yet been received. I should liave been much gratified to have obtained the information called for l>y the resolution, befoi-e entering upon any discussion of this subject. But, sir, as the sesjBipn is drawing to a close, I am un- willing to await longer the dilltory movements of the Executive, before calling the attention of this llonse, and of tlie whole country, so far as I am able, to a question of vital importance, not only to my constituents, but to the people of our common 'country. Sir, at this time, when the subject of a modification of our tariff laws is challenging so much attention in Congress and throughout the country, the practical operation of this Reciprocity Treaty becomes a subject of peculiar interest to the American statesmati. To what extent it ties our hands against legislation liiiiiirii ar" BOiue industrial interests of our c.uzens to ,vluch mo con attVud no protection as against lore.gu competition S/^Iv'e' nolS'S^ aSr^'to'T^ninrt S^^'^}^ ^ <\v tliip treaty was commenueu to us uuaer lue '"'"""Ko p„ feir, nut ueai^ wao c rhristened by the name of ''Ue- iif a frpG trade measure. It was ciiribitsnt/u uj i- have been reluS by the people of this country, wo shall be en- abled to indge, when we com« to examine the operations of th« SlSa^iSc^rFl^n Si„ yon have hut to ^ance your eye over this scheduM^ S ^1 rfreTintchan'gTfetUn the two countries of Jhp articles embraced in it, and of those articles only. It appeam Shuyeteen prepared with special reference to mcluding eyery ,_,.,1!t^- „.L ^Mffi!^'^ •article of Canadian prodm-tion which can ever fij\!; "^^j;!;;,;^;" this country, and exc I'dini; every pro(hiction ot tins conmiy wWch conS'-find a market in the British North A"-v)can M^^ nies Tlio surrdns productions of these colonies consist, ahnost eSu.ivel V of the very classes of articles embraced in this sched- X So comuioditL constitute the entire ^us>s of the.r e^- iM^rt trade ; and wo are their nearest and best customers, ad their argestt^i'smners. We purchase from Canada -;";« «^J ;.^ » ^ ] cles embraced in the schedule than she sells to all the woild be- ^"weare also larse producers of the same classes of articles. Of nXf hem!we,\n common with Canada produce a large surplus which must seek H market in some joreign conn ry. ffwe'nrier have found, and never shall J"^' ff^ '"^^^^i", Canada, or in any of the provinces <^™^'-««;,^ .;";^'^,^\'ff:.,, ,^ Canada the privilege of exporting to the United S ates ticc ot duty the ardc\es emLaced iJi the schedule, is one oi nj^^al-^^^^^^^^^^ valie. It is all that she could ask or desire— for the sc leclu e In mces everything she has to export. To us, the privilege ot expoS the slme articles duty free to Canada, is but the barren tunvileee of " carrying coals to Newcastle. ^ it isfnie that Cana§a, and the other British provinces embraced in the treaty, would open to us a most desirable market lor a gVat variety' of the pJoductions of our manufactories and our Sshops ff they could ^o there duty free, or at reasonab e rates of duty. T ey would furnish a valuable market foi our leather boots and shoes, and other manufactures of leather; for oui reaping, mowing, and threshing machines, and other agricul- ?^ aUmplements; for our multifarious ^^-^^^-'''''\,fj;'\^^ steel of brass, and other metals; for our carriages, saddlery and harnesB ; for our machinery, our fire-arms, an! our edge-^ools for our cotton, woolen, and india-rubber goods, and for an almost endless variety of the products of Yankee ingenuity, industry and enterprise, which I shall not attempt to enumerate. But all these proEi^ns are excluded from the schedule with as scrupu- ous aCe L every conceivable article of .Canadian producUon which can find a market in this country is inc uded in it And not only are they excluded from the list of articles made tree by ?he treaty, but the colonial authorities are left a liberty to in- crease thiir imposts upon ihem at pleasure; a privilege thj W exercised to tlii point of prohibition in respect to ™any ot them. Mr. Chairman when the President shall, in his own g?od tmie • respond to the resolution which has just been read he will doubt- less send us a copy of the report recently made hy the Hon. Israel T Hatch, of the State whicli I have the honor in part to repre- sent, whJ was appointed a special agent to examine into the ope- rations of this treaty, and report thereon. I desired much that that document should be communicated to this Houee before 1 should proceed to the discussion of this subject ; biit I am not, wholly i^orant of the character of its conten s. When it shall be madeVbUc, if I am not greatly mistaken, it will be found to milSi ,^.. ^,.«.-i..a..^- A*^"- justify, and more tlmn jnatify, all that I have said, or shall say, I in deiuiuciatioii of this treaty as an nmnitigated chgat and swindle. I propose to examine, first, the effects of this treaty upon our federal revenues. During the year 1854:, which was the last year previous to the taking effect of the treaty, we derived a • revenue from ax'ticles imported from Canada alone, which are now made free hy the treaty, of ahout $1,250,000, and including all the provinces embraced in the treaty, amounting to more than !jIITT. ,„,^, tll6,847,82a If. 10.375 185«* 17,600,737 091,007 W6'' 11,1107,018 818,953 1868 18,703,748 604,909 186» ' ' J59,419,925 *2,16(),394 From this table it will be seen that during tlfc four years next succoodinj. tlie treaty, our imports from Canada amoun ed to Xlv three times as much as (luring the four years nnmed.ately p'ieiediag i s ratification. It will also be seen that while lor tour voars next ureceding the treaty, more than tour-hfths ot all our Soratfons^from Canada wore subject to duty, for the our yeai^ subsequent to it less than one twenty-ninth paii ot hem ha e contributed anything whatever to our revenue. And even ot tlic Sng mnount^s of importations from tl^'*\«?""^'T w "ch have paid luties since the treaty, less than onethird are the pro.luc- Eons of Canada. Of the $2,150,394 paying dxity during tliefo -years subsequent to the treaty as shown by the f*;^^ "S ^^^^^^ Iron hardware, and salt, articles not produced in Canada foi ox- port'atlon, make un the sum of $1,548,156 being --e than two- thirds of the whole amount. So that m tact, ot all the pioduc- tons of Canada which seek our markets, the proportion paying Zy is so utterly insignificant as to be wholly unworthy of con- Sation; ranging, one year with another, somewhere between "^^^ZMXAn^r^ to .ay heavy, and increas- ing duties upon much more than one-haff ot all our exports to Canada, as will appear by another table which I now present showinc^ t^e value of our exports to that country, -paying duty and free of duty, for the four years next succeedmg tlie year that the treaty took effect. i , Value of ooods exported from the United States to Canada. ,, rutwo y y X- ., . PATINO DUTY. FREE OF DUTY. ,.'• . 111,446,472 19,379,204 ' }f"- ;■ 12,770,923 9,933,580 , J°tS .... 9,906,430 10,258,220 1868;!:!!!!i'.'.".."..'.".".-'""-"'-"""--'-- 8,4'73,607 7.161.958 $42,660,432 $30,732,908 ' '^{Jf the articles which go to make up this item of $36,732,968, exported to Canada free of duty, onfy a small proporti on have ■T^,;7~;;:;;;~rm7i^mitted because they were in part made before Au- fr"- *" ♦""'»• ^ff«rt*-- ftn'^ in nart afterwards. i^mHmmIMkmMI mmitJikitr. ■ ■■-■■liiSfeMiiWfa 8 cone in free hecauae of the treaty, tho loadinc; vnriotioH having boon adniittod free botbio tho treaty oxistod. Wheat, tor in- Btanco, ono of the larRO itetnB in tho HhI ot our troo oxpoiaB to Canada, was admitted free before .tho treaty, and would have continued bo if tho treaty had never boon nuide, because it m tho interest of Canadian millers and Bhip-owners to have it bo admitted. It does not go to Canada for consumption tlioro— l^an- ada herself producing much more wheat than sho consumes, it is either returned to us in Uie form of Hour, duty tree, or shipped abroad. In either case tho eflfect is rather preiudicial than bene- ficial to American industry and entorpriso. If it gooB to l.anada merely to be converted into flour anti returned to us, our millers lose the profit of manufacturing it. If it goes there to bo shipi>cd to Europe, in foreign bottoms, our ship-owners lose the pronta of carrying it. So, although our wheat does not go into Canada free of duty, because of the treaty, it would bo no argument in favor of tho treaty even if it did. Indian corn, another promi- nent item in tho free list, was also free belore tho treaty, and would have remained free independent of the treaty, becanso Canada is not herself a corn-producing country, and tinds it to her advantage to pnrchaso com from us. , * „„j In the tables I have presented, of exports and imports to and from tho United States and Canada, foreign merchandise merely carried through the respective countries, is included, lo sliow the effects of the treaty upon the industrial interests of the tAvo countries, however, foreign merchandise should be excluded, and the domestic products of the resnective countries only embraconess ot whose vh-gin lani, and the comparative lightness ot whose taxes ena- bles them to' undersell us in our own markets, j^"' ^^«^^^^J suppose that the agricultural products ot Canada, thus thrown uprmir markets, l?P.ve no series influence in depressu^ price , have taken but a vpry supeifieial view ot_ the fY'Lri^Tlul'- sons I apprehend, would regard the closing ot the ports ot i.ng- and against our vkieat and lour as a K-^^ calamity to the wheat growofs of this country. And yet it would be less ^^^^J *<> their inierests than this throwing open ot our markets to Jl « whea and flour of Canada. Daring the hscal year ending on te 30tl of June, 1859, the value of wheat and flour imported by us tiom CamX was more than double that of all we exported to England *^The frefadmission of the agricultural productions of Canaaa to our markets, tends to equalize the value of lands on both sideb of tl e line, to the great disadvantage of our own landed propne- ti. Sir, it is a self-evident proposition that lands on the Canada side of the line, equally productive with lands on our own side, are intrinsically worth L'much, if the same ^«P^«ts a.^ ccuuinon to both, and equally accessible to both-especia Uy it the Canada ands are subject to less taxation than ours. .K it could be known that the provisions of the treaty would be indefinitely perpetu- ated, laVd in my own District, the richest portion of the Genesee Valley! which before the treaty would haye commanded sra^ty dMaJsmr acre, would be intrinsically worth little, it any more, Slaifdson^he other side of the lini that could nave been pur- chased at the same time for less than ^^'^^V /^^^'^'''^fJZ equalization is effected, as much by depreciating the value of the higher-priced, as by increasing the value of the lower-priced lands \e injurious eft^ects of this treaty upon our mechanical and luanufacturing interests, spring ma,inly from the '' J^^^^f ^^ JPf" islation" which the treaty has put it in the power of the Canadian PaXment to practice towards them. The increasing duties which have been levfed trom year to year upon the productions o our ^vorkshops and manufactories, since the ratification ot .tl»e tieaty, have been driving them out of the Canadian markets. Many ot these productions which still sought those "^^^kets in spite ot the increasing impositions upon them, prior to 1859, are by the tanff act oTthlt vSar whou/ excluded. That act has not been long enlugh in fm-ce to furii any statistics showing to what ex ent imStions of manufactured articles from this country will be diiShed by it; It api>ear*, howfeier, froin a table which I have „iTJ^Tri.u{ft.HdmttkDrodueteofthis'country, paying d^^^^ Fn Clnkdalconsisting, almosUxcluslvely, of manutact^^^^^^^ decUned from $7,981,284 in 1856, to $4,524,503, m 1858. Under ifci ' ''■\ -"--■ >-— "^^W-^, s^.lo'-JI '"' 11 « tho operation of tlio Canadian tariff act of 1830, tlio fulling off must be in a still greater ratio. In fact these onerous dntics are not only driving our manufactures out of the Canadian niarkets, but they are tending to the transfer of capital and enterprise from this country to that. Many of our most enterprising manufac- turers have' already transplanted their establishments to Canadian soil, to secure the benefit of her markets without being subjected to these duties ; and many more will follow their example. Thus, under the operation of a policy which owes its existence to this treaty, we are not only losing a valuable trade, but actually losing a most valuable class of citizens, and no inconsiderable amount of solid capital. This treaty operates to the prejudice of our merchants and traders' also, not only by diminishing their sales to Canada, of the products' of our manufactories — excluded from her markets as I have just shown— but they also suffer from " unfriendly legisla- tion" on the part of the Canadian rarliameut. Formerly, the peo])le of Canada AYest purchased numy of the productions of foreign countries in our markets, paying no higher duties upon them than if purchased in the country of their production, and introduced by the river St. Lawrence. The duties then beitig specific, they amounted to no more on goods introduced by the way of our Atlantic cities, than when introduced through the St. Lawrence. But the law has been changed, and ad valorem du-^ ties are now charged, upon the value of the goods at ilu lylace of purclum. The Canadian purchaser, therefore, if he now buys his goQds in Boston or New York, must not only pay duty upon the original cost in tho foreign country, but upon that cost with interest, freight, insurance, and profito of the American merchant added, Tliis policy now drives the merchant of western Canada to Montreal, to purchase the goods which he formerly bought in our own markets. And this operates not only to the prejudice of our raercliaiits, but of our carriers as well. The legislation which has produced this result, is one of the indirect and incidental effects of the treaty ; at least, it is legislation which we might counteract, if our hands were not tied by the treaty. No class of our pitizens have felt more keenly the pernicious effects of this abominable treaty, than our enterprising lumber- men. We have no resources for the production of lumber at all comparable to the vast primeval forests of Canada, New Bruns- wick, and Nova Scotia. The timber lands in these provinces are mostly owned by the Government, which grants the privilege of cutting timber, at prices little more than nominal. The himb6r- men of this conntry, who have to pay high prices for inferior timber lands, cannot successfully compete with the products of these forests. The throwing open of our markets to them, has rendered inany large iavestments in the timber lauds of this coun- try ruinous to their proprietors, and stricken down numerous large enierprices undertaken by our. citizens, with the brightest pros; pecta of success. Much American capital and enterprise has thus been driven out of our own country to seek investment and em- ploy luciit iu tuc iOfcsta Oi tusse provinces. 12 Even onv fishermen, for whose fecial benefit the large conces- eions of this treaty were supposed to be made, hnd that the privi- lege accorded to" them of taking fish in the bays, harbors, and creeks of the British provinces, is more than counterbalanced by the like privilege extended to British siibiects, of taking hsh upon onr shores and coasts, coupled, as it is, with the still more nnport- ant privilege of introducing the products of their hshenes into our markets, duty free. . , Pennsylvania will in vain demand protection to her great coal interest, while this treaty remains in force. So long as ^ova Scotia, by means of cheap and easy water-carriage, can tiirow the products of her extensive coal mines into all our seaboard markets, duty free, protection to the coal interests ot 1 ennsylva- nia and Maryland will be wholly out of the question, in vain will they appeal to Congress for relief, while our power to grant it is paralyzed by this treaty. ., ' 1 1 ■„4.^ Mr. Chairman, without pretending to go very thoroughly into this subject, or to notice any but the most prominent features in the opektions of this treaty, I trust I have succeeded in showing that there is no " reciprocity " in the article which provides lor a free interchange of the commodities enumerated in the schedule. I trust I have succeeded in showing, that as affecting every pub- lic or private interest, the advantages of this arrangement are all on one side, and all against us. Where, then, are the reciprocal benefits conferred upon our citizens? Outside of this airange- ment, for the free interchange of the productions specified in the schedule, there are but two provisions of the treaty which pre-- tend to confer any privileges or benefits upon the people ot this country. These provisions are — 1st The grant of a privilege to the inhabitanta of the United St«tf« »« t»J« fish of every kind, except shell fish, on the sea coast and shores, and in the bavs JaZrs and^creeks'of CaLda, New Brunswick. Nova Scot a and P"""* Ef-«- » Island and of thrf several islands adjacent thereto, without being restricted to any distance from the shore ; and of drying their nets and curing their fish on the shores "^jrrgtniri'^cSns of the United States, of the right to navigate th river St Lawrence and the canals in Canada, used as the means of communicating betwS «ie great lakes and the Atlantic Ocean, with their vessels, boat, and craf s subject only to tlie same tolls and assessments as are or may be exacted of BritiBh subjecte. Sir if we have received any benefits from the treaty to com- pensate us, in the slightest degree, for the ruinous concessions made by the third article, it must be by virtue of one or the other, or both of these provisions. ^ , , ,i_ «,!, I have already stated that the privileges conferred by the hsU- inff grant, are more than compensated by a similar privilege ex- tended to British subjects on our part, and by the privilege of in- troducinited advantages to be derived from the ^00 naviga- tion of the St. Lawrence, have proved utterly delusive. That ■ ver is ce-bo nd nearly half the year, and when it is open, oiir avieators do not see fit to avail themselves of the privilege of Sfi b-.nce the ratification of the treaty, up to the closing of avfea on in 1859, it appears by official statements that onlv /o.^| Skean vessels, 'with only 12,550 tons burden, IukI P^^f ^^f" ward through that river, and only mneteen vesses, with on y 5 446 tons burden, had returned from sea through the same clian- uel And this is the sum total of all the much-vaunt.Kl benefits W were to derive trom the free navigation of the St. LaAvi-ence I Wa it for this that we sacrificed an annual revenue two mil- lions of dollars ? Was it for this that we threw open our ports to aU the agricultural products of the British provinces, to surfeit our markets°already made plethoric by the productions ol our own BoU ? Wa S this that we put it'in the power of the Canadian Parliament to drive the products of our workshops and manutac- WsLmher marts, by ihe imposition of onerous taxes upon S Was it for this that we struck down the value ot our timber ands, and visited disaster and ruin ui)on many enteiTnsmg ci - zens who were engaged in the lumbering business^ Is it toi this, ?ha? capital and enterprise are being driven outot our own coun- try, and transplanted to a foreign soil J • ,• „ ,1,^ Of ^But,8ir, even this miserable privilege of "^vigating the St. . Lawrence was only granted to us upon the conditaon that British BiSs should have the right freely to navigate Lake Michigan • Sh their vessels, boats, and crafts, so long as the privilege ot Tv gating the St. Lawrence should be en oyed by Amenean cit- hJm And now let us see how these reciprocal privileges com- X as to results. In the year 1857, one hundred and mne Brit- F^ vessdB cleared from the sh.gle port of Chicago, on Lake Mi- cWn-freighted, doubtless, mainly by the products ot our grea S Kro^^-ing region of the Northwest-to the great dctnmen ff our^iwn ship owners and carriers. Thus, it will be seen hat instead of receiving any benefits from the privilege ol navigating ■ the St? Lawrence, "0 compensate for the large concessions of the tl^ary, we only obtained that privilege by grantmg a similar one to British subiects, of ten times its value. , • I object, fuJther'more, to this article in respect to the navigation of the St. Lawrence, that, by receiving it as a favor, lor a limi- ted period, and for an expressed and continuing consideration we vFreclude ourselves from taking the higher and true ground Tat it belongs to us by the law of nat ons. That is a position we ought never to yield. We occupied it in respect to the Missis- S, when LoJsiana belonged to a foreign power. It is the 1 osi- ? on ^^ which the publicists of Europe have been steadily tending sinc/tl-e treaties of 1815, which terminated the g'ft^ars/)* Napoleon, and it is even more imperatively demanded by the ^.ll^^ul nf fi,ia nnntinftnt. We are insietmg upon it at this 1 u time "In the interest of our commerce with the nations upon the vallies of the great rivers of South America, and we ought not to abandon it in our own case, as the occupants of a part of tlie upper valley of the St. Lawrence. And yet, accepting this priv- ilege of outlet to the sea, as a purchased favor under this treaty, why are we not estopped from claiming it as our right under the law of nations ? Tlie privilege of navigating the canals of Canada, communica- ting between the great lakes and the ocean, with oar vessels, boats, and^rafts, on payment of the same tolls as are charged to British subjects, was no new privilege granted by the treaty. It is a privi- lege which we had enjoyed before, without any treaty stipulation on the subject, and which it would have been the height of folly, on the part of the Canadian Government, to have withdrawn from us. These canals were built for the purpose of drawing the trade of our western States to the ports of Montreal and Quebec, and to close them against our vessels,*would not only defeat the object for which they were created, but diminish the revenues derivable therefrom. We need no treaty stipulations to protect us against an act so suicidal. And yet we are not permitted to enjoy tliis privi- lege even, in the true spirit in which it was granted. By a regu- lation of the Canadian Government, wlicat, flour, and corn, pass- ing through the Weliund canal, only twenty-eight miles in length, are charged the same tolls as if they also passed through all the St. Lawrence canals to the ocean. These articles constitute al- most the entire freight of our vessels passing through the Wel- land canal, and not one in twenty of our vessels pass through any other canal but that. Although this regulation applies as well to British vessels, as to our own, yet- as nearly all the wheat, flour, and corn, transported by the AVellani canal, is carried by Ameri- can vessels, the hardship falls almost exclusively upon American interests. The regulation, therefore, practically operates as an odious discrimination against us. Mr. Chainnan, I have now gone through with my indictment against this misnamed " Reciprocity Treaty." In the limited time allotted to me, I have only been able to arraign it upon some o^ its most glaring enormities — nor could I attempt to elabomte an argument upon a single count in the indictment. The treaty is the' parent of a long line of minor evils, which have either si)rung directly from its loins, or resulted from acts of the Canadian Par- liament, which never would have been passed if the treaty had not been in existence. All these I have been compelled to pass over entirely. And now, sir, having shown some of the evils of this treaty, I come to the important question — what is the appropriate remedy for them? Must we quietly submit to them for five years longer, and then merely give notice that we desire to terminate the treaty at the end of anotlier year? Sir, I am opposed to this dilatory action. I would strike at once at the root of the evil, by abro- gating the treaty, if th.at be practicable ; and if not, I would lop oft' its branches by a resort to every kind of retaliatory legisla- tion within our power. 16 But, sir, in my judgment we have a right to abrogate this treaty at once. It has been persistently violated in its spirit it not in its letter, by the Canadian Government, ever since the day that it was ratified. Its avowed and manifest objects have been wholly iierverted, and it has been used as a means of deteating and utterly abolishing the international policy which it was in- tended to foster and build up. For years betore this '.'e^vty waB made, the IJritish Government, through her accredited diplomatic agenta, had been urging upon our Government the importance 0? entering into some arrangement to facilitate trade and com- merce between this country and the neighboring British colonies, for the mutual and reciprocal benefit of th^ people of both coun- tries. That the treaty was intended to promote trai e in botli ai- rections-to increase 'the sales of our products to the people ot the Britisli colonies, as well as our purchases of their products, is a proposition that does not admit of a doubt lo assume that our Government would have entered into it with the uiHlerstand- ing that it was to be the foundation of a policy which should close tht ports of the British colonies against all the products o this country which could find a market there, while admitting all the exportable products of those colonies to unrestricted access to our markets, would be to assmne that our Government had deliber- ately and maliciously conspired against the niterests ot is own citizens, for the advantage of strancjers and aliens. It the histoiy of the Negotiations which led to the treaty were wholly blotted out, reason and common sense would forbid any such assumption. The object of the treaty was formally declared, m the preamble, to be, " to regulate the commerce and navigation between their respective territories and people, and more especially between her Maiesty's possessions in North America and the Unued btates, in such manmr as to render the same reciprocaUy Imfcuil and eatisfaetorur Now, sir, when a treaty, whose objects are thus solemnly declared bv its own language, is so perver ed by one party as to utterly defeat those objects, and produce directly op- posite results, is the other party bound to adhere to it i That such has been the effect of the legislation of the Canadian Parliament, since the ratification of the treaty, is undeniable. Thev have not only annually increased their imposts upon all the productions of this country which seek their markets, but thev have so modified their tariflf laws as practically to discrimi- nate against importations from this country, in favor ot all other ^"^The Tendency of their legislation has been, to compel the peo- ple of Oaneda"to purchase their imports from any other country Spon eartli, in preference to the country to which tliey sell their exports • ' effect has been, a rapid decline in our export trade to Canada, e or since the ratification of the treaty. And now, bv their late tariff act of 1859, they have increased these duties to such a point, as must henceforth almost anmhilatfe our export trade to tliat country. Sir, had the Canadian Parliament a right immediately upon the ratification of the treaty, to pass a law absolutely prohibiting all importations from this country, except 1- '""^BE^^^gf^K^'^S^SaaKa^^'^* of the articles Bpecifiod iu the treaty? Can anybody doubt that such legislation would have been in flagrant violation of the treaty i Will anybody contend, that we should be bound by the treaty in the face of such legislation ? And if Canada could not, consistently with the treaty, at once lay an absolute embargo upon importations from this country, can she gradually effect the sanie result by increasing her imposts from year to year, and go modifying her tariff laws as to discriminate against us ? Sir, as the avowed object of this treaty was, according to its own terms, " to regulate bommeree and navigation" between the two countries in " such nianner as to render tno same reciprocally beneficial and satisfactory," any act by either party tending to prohibit and abolish such commerce, is not only a violation of the spirit of the treaty, but of its express letter. Wlien the treaty, setting out with this broad and liberal declaration of its objects, went on to specify certain enumerated articles which ehoiild be admitted into each country, from the other, entirely free of duty, was there not an implied agreement that articles not specified should continue to be aamitted into each country on at least as favorable terms as then existed ? It appears to me, sir, that any other construction of the treaty makes it an instrument to defeat the very policy and objects, which, according to its own terms, it was intended to foster and promote, Mr. Chairman, no one holds our treaty obligations more sacred than I do. I v/ould perform, with scrupulous fidelity, all our in- ternational engagements, without stopping to weigh the advan- tages, so long as good faith was kept towards us on the other side- But when a treaty, imposing mutual obligations and duties, is fereistenly violated, circumvented and perverted by one party, hold that it ceases to impose obligations on the other. Iu such a case, the injured party has a two-fold remedy. It can ■ either appeal to the last arbiter of nations, to compel the delin- quent party to perform its dutj,, or it can annul the treaty, and drive tne other party to offensive measures, if she does not choose to submit. Sir, in my judgment, this choice of remedies is pre- sented to us in respect to this treaty. If the treaty, faithfully performed on both sides, would enure to our benefit, it rrllght be policy to hold the other party to its strict performance. But inas- much as it will operate to our disadvantage in any . event, I would resort to the other remedy — annul it, and take the conse- 3uence8. Entertaining these views, it is my intention, at an early ay, to introduce a bul to repeal the act of August 5, 1854, to carry into effect thfe provisions of this treaty^ and the act amenda- tory thereto, approved March 2d, 1865 — with a clause declaring all imports from the British North American Provinces, subject to the same duties as are imposed upon imports from other countries. ^*i .^ ... J